Is This True? [Slightly Off-Topic]


#1

I didn’t know where else to post this, but I figured this would be a good place since most of you are active with XBLA. I purchased SF: Hyper Fighting for XBLA years ago, but absolutely hated it for whatever reason. I didn’t think I would because I loved SF2, SSF2, SSF2T, and so forth. Anyway, last night I played to get all the online achievements. Why is this game so different from the other SF’s? I don’t remember Street Fighter being like this. A few minor examples:

  • Honda’s handslap could beat everything? I even got HHS’ed in the middle of a combo!
  • Facing Ryu and Ken, they were able to sweep me in the middle of a combo (ex. I used Vega and did a string of cr. mp’s, and yet I’d get sweeped very easily in the middle of it all)

The game also has some input delay, it really kills everything. And for whatever reason the priority of every attack is severely screwed. Anyone else play it? I saw many of your tags in the leaderboards so please post your thoughts!


#2

Some combos in later SF’s may not necessairly work in HF.


#3

Your timing is just off. Every SF2 variant (WW to ST) has way different timing/feel. If people are hitting you out of combos, its because you aren’t linking them together correctly. The way online HF handles online play is also a lot different. HF slows down the frame rate to correspond with the ping between players. So someone playing from Europe against someone in the US would feel like fighting in syrup, rather than a hurky-jerky mess that would result in HDR.


#4

Fighting in syrup is better than playing a match of dbz IMO.


#5

They both suck. That’s why I just don’t play high ping matches. As someone whose logged a HUGE amount of time with both HF and HDR on XBL, I can say that HDR’s system is way better.

HF does have a lot of nifty stat tracking that HDR does not though, like character-specific rankings. HDR’s ability to find a player by an actual ping number versus vague “connection quality” boxes is waaaay better though.


#6

GGPO blows HDR out of the water, well at least the PS3 version.


#7

GGPO is nice when you can actually connect to people. It really is a shame that development just completely stopped on it. I wouldn’t say it is “that” much better. I played Alpha 2 and ST on GGPO from when it was offered up until HDR’s release and find both of them very similar.


#8

Than it may be PSN, cause they aren’t even close. Although I do agree with the connection issues, once a connection happens, its so nice. I can even play euro players with bearable connections, where PSN is just teleporting and 0 startup normals.


#9

I don’t even find them similar. Even when I could get low ping matches on ST GGPO (under 100ms), it was still more sluggish and jittery than ST PSN in my experience. I even turned the smoothing as low as I could bear it, and yet I preferred HDR, even at higher pings. The only reason I would play GGPO at all, was for the higher level of comp, that’s it. PSN HDR is not as bad as a lot of people make it out to be tho, it’s actually very good. The problem is not lag, but disconnects and rooms crashing. I’ve never played XBL HDR, but I imagine they’re very close in terms of netcode quality.


#10

How do you explain the definitive difference I see? I’ve got smoothing turned off in PS3, and the slider completely to the left for GGPO. The difference is amazingly apparent.


#11

That’s just *my *experience. I’m sure a lot of people would agree with you.


#12

I suppose it is country specific too.

I’ve also noticed playing 3s on GGPO that when there are like 100 people in the room that lag tends to get heavy too, as opposed to the 35 people in ST.


#13

That’s really interesting. I’ve had the opposite experience. For me it’s been like this:

Low ping(<50ms): GGPO = HDR(XBox) = HDR(PS3)
Medium ping(50~100ms): GGPO > HDR(XBox) >> HDR(PS3)
High ping(100+ms): GGPO >>> HDR(XBox) >>>>>> HDR(PS3)

Basically, GGPO gets linearly worse as ping rises. But HDR gets closer to exponentially worse with PS3 being worse than XBox. That’s just been my experience.

If you can find decent ping games any version is fine. But when it comes to WC vs EC or US vs UK or WC vs Japan the level of quality tends to separate them.


#14

I can deal with slowdown to compensate with ping, but HF just had some horrible input lag. I didn’t test it or anything, but it felt like something in the order of 4 frames. If anyone has a way of testing, that would be cool. Same thing with SF anniversary collection. Horrible input lag. I may not be great at these games, but input lag seriously fucks me up.


#15

Does anyone play GGPO HF?


#16

Maybe I am imagining things, but IMHO lag affects CE and HF more than ST. I just don’t find it reasonable to even try to identify some projectile speed and decide whether to block it, jump staight up, SRK though it or tatsu through it. Walk up tatsu on Ken seems quite hard, also. Same for trying to punish normals. I suppose players who are actually good at the game find it even more unplayable or, in the very least, just too different from offline CE/HF.

And GGPO CPS-1 SFII desyncs a lot, too.


#17

http://sonichurricane.com/?p=1864

Found this, apparently HF didn’t have a consistent formula for skipping frames.


#18

I played HF pretty religiously when it was out in the arcades, and also on snes, which was a lesser version, but still pretty good. I had the same issue with HF on XBLA when it was released, and just couldn’t get into it. Norieaga, i’d say your problem was caused by a combination of HF just being plain different to ST/HDR, as well as the fact that the XBLA netcode was horribly implemented and the whole experience was less than smooth at any kind of distance, and generally more unpredictable the further away you tried to connect.

As posted, HF is a vastly different game to ST. It’s easy to forget that now because both games are generally available to everybody side by side, and look more or less the same if you don’t know the subtle differences, but as someone who played both fairly seriously back in the day, it was really something that kind of split the community where i was playing into an “old vs new” argument for the first time that i remember. So many serious HF players just felt that the jump that was made going from the CPS1 games to the CPS2 ones like super street fighter 2 and super turbo just made the game too different in one fell swoop for it to feel like a natural progression the way it did going from world warrior to champion, or champion to hyper. Lots of guys just opted to stick with the game they knew rather than learning what they saw was a completely new game where they had to re-learn even their main to an extent, and for ages after the release of Super and even ST, the Hyper machines were as busy as they had always been.

It’s the same reason i love SF2 but don’t play SF4: They’re just too different.

In the case of Hyper versus Super Turbo, there are loads of examples of different move priorities, input windows, changes to cancellability of attacks, hitboxes, animations, combos, etc. that had a big effect on the game For example, my main, Dicator is a totally different character in HF to ST, and requires loads of completely different strategies. Some of my most favourite “go-to” stuff in ST isn’t even possible in HF, and vice versa so i just have to re-adapt. When you combine those built in differences with the general suckiness of the online code of what felt like a fairly cheaply made XBLA port from capcom, with input lag, poor connections and frameskip etc, it just made for a pretty shoddy online experience overall, unless you were playing someone that was half a mile down the road.

HDR’s netcode is far superior to HF on XBLA, to my mind there’s no comparison. I can play intercontinentally on HDR without any major problems, whereas HF is useless at all but the smallest distances, and because of that it totally fell by the wayside for me, but the odd time i do manage to get a game on it that isn’t affected by connection issues, it’s still pretty fun if you can keep track of the differences between the versions.

Exactly! These games are not meant to be played at hi pings anyway, anything over 100 to 150 depending on what platform you’re on is more or less irrelevant. Streetfighter was meant to be played with another guy on the cabinet next to you, bumping elbows, so online is just a second best option, albeit a very popular one. It really shouldn’t be made any worse by introducing massive distances into the equation.

They’re not. PSN HDR is total shit in comparison, it shouldn’t even be held up as an example. It is a bugged game, plain and simple. I own both and have played each one more than enough to be able to make a good comparison, and it’s plain to see that HDR netcode was developed for Xbox and then ported over for PSN to save cash, bugs be damned. At moderate distances XBOX can hold it’s head up with GGPO. Maybe not to the same exact level of quality, but to be honest i think they’re fairly close, but there’s no way you will get as stable a connection on PSN, with as bug free, crash free, and non laggy/jumpy gameplay for anywhere near as long as you would get on either of the other two once you get going, unless you’re playing over very short distances, and even then it’s only a case of playing as much as you can before the room implodes and you lose everybody again.


#19

Was there ever a tier list released? I was using Vega online and realized how awful he was without an anti-air. I imagine Dhalsim was lower too because his fire knocked down.


#20

Like any game, people argue about the tiers a fair bit. But in general, Ryu, Guile, Blanka, and Sagat are very strong. Dhalsim, Vega, and Bison all got nerfed pretty hard from CE and are near the bottom. It’s a pretty balanced game though. There’s a big thread about it in the general Fighting Game forum.